Framing a theory-grounded research agenda related to institutions of higher education Barbara Holland, Higher Education Consultant & Senior Scholar, Center for Service & Learning,Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis [holland.barbaraa@gmail.com] Kevin Kecskes, Associate Vice Provost for Engagement & Director of Community-UniversityPartnerships, Portland State University [kecskesk@pdx.edu] Lorilee Sandmann, Professor, University of Georgia [sandman@uga.edu] Keywords: Research agenda, theory, institutionalization, engaged departments, institutional leadership Conference track: Contexts and methods: Theoretical and conceptual frameworks, research designs, and methodological issues Format: Symposium Summary This symposium is one of five sessions in a series on framing a research agenda in multiple arenas: students, faculty, institutions, communities, and partnerships. Drawing on Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment (Clayton, Bringle, & Hatcher, in press), we will discuss theories relevant to research related to higher education institutions (specifically, institutionalization, engaged departments, and institutional leadership), critique previous research in this arena, and collaboratively generate recommendations for practice and future research. We will open the session by inviting collaborative critique of research related to institutions of higher education. We will share a model for conceptualizing research in terms of the convergence of theory, design, practice, and measurement (Bringle, Clayton, & Hatcher, in press) and use it to frame the discussion. Barbara Holland will discuss how organizational change theories, especially leadership and change management theories, can help explain how some institutions operationalize the factors that promote institutionalization. Through an understanding of organizational change theories and processes, researchers and practitioners can develop assessment tools that enable measurement of the institutionalization of engagement in the context of an organization’s overall strategic directions rather than as a separate activity. A research agenda related to institutional change will be outlined. Kevin Kecskes suggests that academic departments play a key role both in providing and modeling the skills and behaviors that students need in order to be successful and productive global citizens in the 21st century and in advancing transformation of institutions and reform of the academy. He will bring organizational change theory, cultural theory, and institutional theory to bear on discussion of investigating engaged departments. A research agenda related to engaged departments will be outlined. Lorilee Sandmann suggests that there is an urgent need for the assessment of service learning and community engagement leadership at all levels—program/center directors, department heads/chairs and deans, CAOs, and CEOs—and as it is enacted collectively. She will apply emerging understandings of institutional leadership to investigating how and why leaders’ roles influence institutional effectiveness in meeting goals for service learning and community engagement. A research agenda related to institutional leadership will be outlined. References Battistoni, R. M., Gelmon, S. B., Saltmarsh, J. A., Wergin, J. F., & Zlotkowski, E. (2003). The engaged department toolkit. Providence, RI: Campus Compact. Birnbaum, R. (2000). Management fads in higher education: Where they come from, what they do, why they fail. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bowman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1984). Modern approaches to understanding and managing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bringle, R. G. (2003). Enhancing theory-based research on service-learning. In S. H. Billig & J. Eyler (Eds.), Deconstructing service-learning: Research exploring context, participation, and impacts (pp. 3-21). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Bringle, R. G., Clayton, P. H., & Hatcher, J. A. (in press). Research on service learning: An introduction. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher, (Eds). Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2A & 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2000). Meaningful measurement of theory-based service-learning outcomes: Making the case with quantitative research [Special issue]. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall, 68-75.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2002). University-community partnerships: The terms of engagement. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 503–516.
Bringle, R. G., Phillips, M., & Hudson, M. (2004). The measure of service learning: Research scales to assess student experiences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2000). Institutionalization of service learning in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 71(3), 273-290.
Clayton, P. H., Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (Eds). (in press). Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment (Vol. 2A & 2B). In R. G. Bringle & J. A. Hatcher (Series Eds.), IUPUI Series on Service Learning Research. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Eastman, J., & Lang, D. (2001). Mergers in higher education: Lessons from theory and experience. Toronto: University of Toronto.
Ellis, R., & Thompson, F. (1997). Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest. The American Political Science Review, 91(4), 885-897.
Furco, A. (2003). Self-assessment rubric for the institutionalization of service-learning in higher education. Providence, RI: Campus Compact.
Furco, A., & Holland, B. A. (in press). Improving research on service learning institutionalization through attention to theories of organizational change. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher (Eds.), Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Gray, M. J., Heneghan, J., Fricker, R. D., & Geschwind, S. (2000). Assessing service- learning: Results from a survey of Learn and Serve America. Los Angeles, CA: RAND.
Hodgkinson, V. A. (2004). Developing a research agenda on civic service. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(4), 184S-197S.
Holland, B. A. (1997). Analyzing institutional commitment to service: A model of key organizational factors. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 4(1), 30-41.
Hood, C. (1998). The art of the state: Culture, rhetoric, and public management. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
Kecskes, K. (2006). Engaging departments: Moving faculty culture from private to public, individual to collective focus for the common good. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Kecskes, K. (in press). The engaged department: Research, theory, and transformation of the academic unit. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher (Eds.), Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Kecskes, K., Gelmon, S., & Spring, A. (2006). Creating engaged departments: A program for organizational and faculty development. To improve the academy: Resources for faculty,instructional and organizational development, 24, 147-165.
Kezar, A. J. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st century. New York, NY: Wiley.
Kezar, A. J. (2005). Moving from I to we: Re-organizing for collaboration in higher education. Change, 37(6), 50-57.
Kezar, A. J., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the “L” word in leadership:The revolution of research on leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Kotter, J. P., &. Cohen, D. S. (2002). The heart of change: Real life stories of how people change their organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Kramer, M. (2000). Making it last forever: The institutionalization of service-learning. Washington, DC: Corporation for National and Community Service.
Levine, A. (1980). Why innovation fails. Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Ramaley, J. A. (2002). Moving mountains: Institutional culture and transformational change. In R. M. Diamond (Eds.), Field Guide to Academic Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Sandmann, L. R., & Plater, W. M. (2009). Leading the engaged institution. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(147), 13-24.
Sandmann, L. R., & Plater, W. M. (in press). Research on institutional leadership for service learning. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher (Eds.), Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Sandmann, L. R., Thornton, C. H., & Jaeger, A. J. (Eds.). (2009). Institutionalizing community engagement in higher education: The first wave of Carnegie classified institutions [Special issue]. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(147).
Steinberg, K. S., Bringle, R. G., & Williams, M. J. (2010). Service learning research primer. Scotts Valley, CA: National Service-Learning Clearinghouse.
Thompson, M., Ellis, R. J., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Zlotkowski, E., & Saltmarsh, J. (2006). The engaged department in the context of academic change. In K. Kecskes (Ed.), Engaging departments: Moving faculty culture from private to public, individual to collective focus for the common good (pp. 278-290). Bolton, MA: Anker.
To access materials rom this session please click on the file link(s) below:
Framing a theory-grounded research agenda related to institutions of higher education
Barbara Holland, Higher Education Consultant & Senior Scholar, Center for Service & Learning,Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis [holland.barbaraa@gmail.com]
Kevin Kecskes, Associate Vice Provost for Engagement & Director of Community-UniversityPartnerships, Portland State University [kecskesk@pdx.edu]
Lorilee Sandmann, Professor, University of Georgia [sandman@uga.edu]
Keywords: Research agenda, theory, institutionalization, engaged departments, institutional leadership
Conference track: Contexts and methods: Theoretical and conceptual frameworks, research designs, and methodological issues
Format: Symposium
Summary
This symposium is one of five sessions in a series on framing a research agenda in multiple arenas: students, faculty, institutions, communities, and partnerships. Drawing on Research on Service Learning: Conceptual Frameworks and Assessment (Clayton, Bringle, & Hatcher, in press), we will discuss theories relevant to research related to higher education institutions (specifically, institutionalization, engaged departments, and institutional leadership), critique previous research in this arena, and collaboratively generate recommendations for practice and future research.
We will open the session by inviting collaborative critique of research related to institutions of higher education. We will share a model for conceptualizing research in terms of the convergence of theory, design, practice, and measurement (Bringle, Clayton, & Hatcher, in press) and use it to frame the discussion.
Barbara Holland will discuss how organizational change theories, especially leadership and change management theories, can help explain how some institutions operationalize the factors that promote institutionalization. Through an understanding of organizational change theories and processes, researchers and practitioners can develop assessment tools that enable measurement of the institutionalization of engagement in the context of an organization’s overall strategic directions rather than as a separate activity. A research agenda related to institutional change will be outlined.
Kevin Kecskes suggests that academic departments play a key role both in providing and modeling the skills and behaviors that students need in order to be successful and productive global citizens in the 21st century and in advancing transformation of institutions and reform of the academy. He will bring organizational change theory, cultural theory, and institutional theory to bear on discussion of investigating engaged departments. A research agenda related to engaged departments will be outlined.
Lorilee Sandmann suggests that there is an urgent need for the assessment of service learning and community engagement leadership at all levels—program/center directors, department heads/chairs and deans, CAOs, and CEOs—and as it is enacted collectively. She will apply emerging understandings of institutional leadership to investigating how and why leaders’ roles influence institutional effectiveness in meeting goals for service learning and community engagement. A research agenda related to institutional leadership will be outlined.
References
Battistoni, R. M., Gelmon, S. B., Saltmarsh, J. A., Wergin, J. F., & Zlotkowski, E. (2003). The engaged department toolkit. Providence, RI: Campus Compact.
Birnbaum, R. (2000). Management fads in higher education: Where they come from, what they do, why they fail. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bowman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1984). Modern approaches to understanding and managing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bringle, R. G. (2003). Enhancing theory-based research on service-learning. In S. H. Billig & J. Eyler (Eds.), Deconstructing service-learning: Research exploring context, participation, and impacts (pp. 3-21). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Bringle, R. G., Clayton, P. H., & Hatcher, J. A. (in press). Research on service learning: An introduction. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher, (Eds). Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2A & 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2000). Meaningful measurement of theory-based service-learning outcomes: Making the case with quantitative research [Special issue]. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall, 68-75.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2002). University-community partnerships: The terms of engagement. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 503–516.
Bringle, R. G., Phillips, M., & Hudson, M. (2004). The measure of service learning: Research scales to assess student experiences. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (2000). Institutionalization of service learning in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 71(3), 273-290.
Clayton, P. H., Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (Eds). (in press). Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment (Vol. 2A & 2B). In R. G. Bringle & J. A. Hatcher (Series Eds.), IUPUI Series on Service Learning Research. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Eastman, J., & Lang, D. (2001). Mergers in higher education: Lessons from theory and experience. Toronto: University of Toronto.
Ellis, R., & Thompson, F. (1997). Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest. The American Political Science Review, 91(4), 885-897.
Furco, A. (2003). Self-assessment rubric for the institutionalization of service-learning in higher education. Providence, RI: Campus Compact.
Furco, A., & Holland, B. A. (in press). Improving research on service learning institutionalization through attention to theories of organizational change. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher (Eds.), Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Gray, M. J., Heneghan, J., Fricker, R. D., & Geschwind, S. (2000). Assessing service- learning: Results from a survey of Learn and Serve America. Los Angeles, CA: RAND.
Gumport, P.J. (2000). Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives. Higher Education, 39(1), 67-91.
Hodgkinson, V. A. (2004). Developing a research agenda on civic service. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33(4), 184S-197S.
Holland, B. A. (1997). Analyzing institutional commitment to service: A model of key organizational factors. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 4(1), 30-41.
Hood, C. (1998). The art of the state: Culture, rhetoric, and public management. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
Kecskes, K. (2006). Engaging departments: Moving faculty culture from private to public, individual to collective focus for the common good. Bolton, MA: Anker.
Kecskes, K. (in press). The engaged department: Research, theory, and transformation of the academic unit. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher (Eds.), Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Kecskes, K., Gelmon, S., & Spring, A. (2006). Creating engaged departments: A program for organizational and faculty development. To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional and organizational development, 24, 147-165.
Kezar, A. J. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st century. New York, NY: Wiley.
Kezar, A. J. (2005). Moving from I to we: Re-organizing for collaboration in higher education. Change, 37(6), 50-57.
Kezar, A. J., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the “L” word in leadership: The revolution of research on leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kotter, J. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Kotter, J. P., &. Cohen, D. S. (2002). The heart of change: Real life stories of how people change their organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School.
Kramer, M. (2000). Making it last forever: The institutionalization of service-learning. Washington, DC: Corporation for National and Community Service.
Levine, A. (1980). Why innovation fails. Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Ramaley, J. A. (2002). Moving mountains: Institutional culture and transformational change. In R. M. Diamond (Eds.), Field Guide to Academic Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Sandmann, L. R., & Plater, W. M. (2009). Leading the engaged institution. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(147), 13-24.
Sandmann, L. R., & Plater, W. M. (in press). Research on institutional leadership for service learning. In P. H. Clayton, R. G. Bringle, & J. A. Hatcher (Eds.), Research on service learning: Conceptual frameworks and assessment. (Vol. 2B). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Sandmann, L. R., Thornton, C. H., & Jaeger, A. J. (Eds.). (2009). Institutionalizing community engagement in higher education: The first wave of Carnegie classified institutions [Special issue]. New Directions for Higher Education, 2009(147).
Steinberg, K. S., Bringle, R. G., & Williams, M. J. (2010). Service learning research primer. Scotts Valley, CA: National Service-Learning Clearinghouse.
Thompson, M., Ellis, R. J., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Zlotkowski, E., & Saltmarsh, J. (2006). The engaged department in the context of academic change. In K. Kecskes (Ed.), Engaging departments: Moving faculty culture from private to public, individual to collective focus for the common good (pp. 278-290). Bolton, MA: Anker.
To access materials rom this session please click on the file link(s) below: